ArticleJournal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry2023
Development and preliminary validation of the treatment adherence rating scale.
Article in Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing outcomes, mechanisms, and recall of Cognitive Therapy for depression: Dose of constructive memory support strategies.Behaviour research and therapy · 2023Trial
- Do improved patient recall and the provision of memory support enhance treatment adherence?Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry · 2017Trial
- Do the Memory Support Intervention and Improving Memory for Treatment Facilitate Behavior Change in Cognitive Therapy?Cognitive therapy and research · 2026Article
- Article
- Sleep the night before and after a treatment session: A critical ingredient for treatment adherence?Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesPatient adherence to treatment is an important barrier to the implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments (EBPTs). There is a need for simple and deployable measures of patient adherence to treatment for use across EBPTs. The Treatment Adherence Rating Scale (TARS) was developed and validated in two samples.
methodsThis study includes two samples: adults with Major Depressive Disorder who received Cognitive Therapy for depression (Sample 1; N = 48, mean age = 44.27 years), and at-risk adolescents who received either the Transdiagnostic Sleep and Circadian Intervention or Psychoeducation (Sample 2; N = 176, mean age = 14.77 years). Factor structure of the TARS scores was examined via Exploratory Factor Analyses (EFA) in Sample 1 and Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA) in Sample 2. Internal consistency, predictive validity, and construct validity of the TARS scores were examined.
resultsResults from EFA in Sample 1 supported a one-factor model. Results from CFA in Sample 2 suggested that a two-factor model (i.e., agreement and compliance) fit better than a one-factor model. TARS scores from both samples demonstrated adequate predictive validity with primary clinical outcomes and construct validity with treatment expectations. LIMITATIONS: The sample was small with two specific populations. Future research should focus on other patient populations, a larger population, and other EBPTs. Future research examining patient ratings of these items are needed for further validation of the TARS.
conclusionsPreliminary findings support the use of a two-factor model and highlight the potential utility of a simple measure of patient adherence to treatment across age and diagnostic groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.